Klarinet Archive - Posting 000206.txt from 2000/05

From: Topper <leo_g@-----.com>
Subj: re: [kl] Bells & Whistles
Date: Thu, 4 May 2000 07:30:17 -0400

At 10:52 PM -0400 5/2/00, Sendmail Default User wrote:
>x-sender: dnietham@-----.edu
>x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998
>From: "David B. Niethamer" <dnietham@-----.edu>
>To: "KLARINET" <klarinet@-----.org>
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
>Subject: [kl] Bells & Whistles
>
>on 5/2/00 2:11 PM, Kevin Fay (LCA) wrote:
>
>>Rosario Mazzeo and his posse of
>>students regularly lopped the bell rings off their horns to get a different,
>>presumably "better" sounding B natural. Selmer even sold Mazzeo models with
>>these truncated bells.
>
>In the vague recesses of what's left of my memory, I recall seeing Benade
>at some conference or other with a bell that had very little taper on the
>inside. It had the usual outside shape, as I recall, so that it wouldn't
>*look strange* to the casual observer.
>
>I also have a similar vague memory of the Selmer Mazzeo clarinets using a
>variation of this bell.
>
>If we accept the fact that "material doesn't matter" (wood vs. plastic or
>whatever) and accept that it is the bore and tone hole design and surface
>of the bore that most affect the sound, then how can a bell ring - on the
>*outside* mind you, and furthest away from the mouthpiece where the sound
>is generated - have an effect on the sound? I know that different bells
>affect the sound/tuning of clarinets, but it has to be in the bore and
>taper, since the wood is too thick to vibrate in any significant way, no?
>
>David
>
>David Niethamer
>Principal Clarinet, Richmond Symphony
>dnietham@-----.edu
>http://members.aol.com/dbnclar1/

Is it readily accepted that material does not matter? I believe
density/hardness -and mass matters. To me there are more reasons besides my
own degree of human error that identical instruments only digits away from
each other sound different beside that every bore and tone-hole may have
been cut/polished to perhaps one-thousandth degree of tollerance. I would
attribute this to the variable density and grain of the wood, or in the
case of a sax not only the variation of the manufacture process varying the
inner dimensions of the body/tone-holes but that each body will weigh
differently. Thjis was evidenced in six sterling silver Yanigasawa
saxophones which were regulated identically and varied in weight up to 3.8
ounces from the lightest to the heviest. They were not only very different
in timbre from their brass counterpart because they were sterling silver
they were different from each other not only due to mfg tollerences but due
to the differeng weight/thickness-vars and also I suspect the TEMPER of the
metal from the variation in the cooling and burninshing process.

Cheers, Leo

http://members.ebay.com/aboutme/leo_g@-----.com/
"You Take The High Notes" http://helius.carroll.com/p/leo_g/ There is a
difference between "dealers" and musicians that love not only the sound of
music but the tools which make it possible for people to play music. It's
important to set things free so they may ultimately find their way to
their intended parties. I am especially interested in Musical Instrument
History and technical data. Please email me with interesting links. Thank
you:-) Leo

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org